Está en la página 1de 15

INSPIRES

2013

The Magazine for Oxford Politics and International Relations Alumni

A letter From tHe eDItors

Welcome to the third issue of Inspires, the alumni magazine of the Department
of Politics and International Relations (DPIR), University of Oxford. We hope
you enjoy it.
In this issue we have featured a further selection of DPIR research activity,
which conveys a sense of the breadth, scale and quality of research in the
Department, and its impact on the wider world. We have also, at the suggestion
of several alumni, presented an overview of how the various research centres,
networks and programmes of DPIR t together. For the rst time we are
pleased to include an article authored by an alumnus, John Worne (Jesus,
1987), on Soft Power; we very much welcome suggestions for alumni
contributions to future issues. As the Department seeks the best doctoral
students from around the globe, and faces the challenge of fundraising to
bring these students to Oxford, we have outlined the value of the Departments
rich graduate programme and the contribution of DPIR doctoral students
to academia and beyond. And, to continue the popular theme of Life after
DPIR, three alumni provide insights into how studying History and Politics has
inuenced their lives and careers.
This has been a busy year for the DPIR alumni programme. In March we
held our inaugural alumni event in the Department, titled More Europe, Less
Europe, No Europe: podcasts of the talks are on the DPIR website. We were
delighted to meet so many of you in person and to welcome you to the Manor
Road Building. We are currently planning more DPIR alumni events for the
academic year 2013-14 and are hosting three speakers at the University alumni
weekend on 20-22 September 2013. We hope to see you at one or more of
these events - please nd further information and registration details on the
back cover of this magazine.

2013: Issue 3

contents
5

Welcome
Stephen Whiteeld

18

the ethics of Humanitarian Aid


Hugo Slim

researching the republic


Karma Nabulsi

20

DPIr research: Breadth and Depth


Liz Greenhalgh

shall We Blog?
Stuart White

22

recent Publications

10

life after History and Politics

24

12

Burma: on the road to Democracy?


Catherine E. de Vries

Bearing Witness
Jeremy Waldron in conversation
Annette Zimmermann

26

executive education at DPIr

14

soft Power moves to the People


John Worne

27

maxim Kantor: DPIr Artist in residence

16

Keeping the subjects lifeblood Flowing:


Funding our Postgraduates
David Hine

28

Dates for Your Diary

Along with this magazine, last year we produced a DPIR electronic newsletter,
Alumni Newswire, which was circulated to those DPIR alumni for whom we
have email addresses. This included a section on alumni publications and a
space for alumni to share up-to-date information with readers by means of
Class notes. If you are interested in contributing your class notes to the next
issue of the newsletter in December 2013, please complete the section on the
form enclosed with this magazine. Do let us know if you would prefer to receive
a hard copy of the newsletter in the post.
On the enclosed form you will also nd a section requesting
your employment details. We are seeking information on alumni
career pathways partly because this can be inspirational for
our current students and partly because we wish to publicise
alumni achievements in order to attract the next generation of the
brightest and best to DPIR. We appreciate your help with this.
It has been a great pleasure to correspond with so many of
you over the past year. It is very rewarding to see DPIR social
media networks growing and to know that it is important for DPIR
alumni to stay in touch with each other and with Oxford.
You can follow DPIR on Twitter at @Politics_Oxford and on our blog
(joint with the Department of Politics and International Studies at
Cambridge) at @PoliticsinSpire.
As ever, your feedback on this magazine and suggestions
for ways to enhance the DPIR alumni programme are most
welcome. We look forward to hearing from you.
Kate Candy and Stuart White

AcKnoWleDGements
In addition to all the excellent contributors,
the editors would like to thank the following
for their advice and help of various kinds:
James Baldwin
Geoffrey Gertz
Joanna Kay
Ayako Komine
Mark Philp
Philipp Rottwilm
Design
Keiko Ikeuchi (www.keikoikeuchi.co.uk)
Photography Iwan Baan (pp.14-15)
Caroline Gluck/Oxfam/Flickr (p.18)
Keiko Ikeuchi (pp.7, 24-25 and back cover)
Rob Judges, Oxford Image Library (back cover)
Greg Smolonski (p.21)
Susan Taylor (info@susantphotographer.co.uk)
Catherine E. de Vries (front cover and pp.12-13;
http://www.ickr.com/photos/catherinedevries)
Cover photo: The Shwedagon Pagoda in Yangon, one of
Burmas most important tourist destinations.

Get In toUcH:
Department of Politics and
International Relations,
University of Oxford,
Manor Road, Oxford OX1 3UQ,
United Kingdom
Email: alumni@politics.ox.ac.uk
Phone: +44 (0)1865 278700

correction
In our Alumni around the world feature,
pp. 12-13, 26, Inspires 2013, we
incorrectly stated that Bill Clinton was
awarded a BPhil in Politics: in fact, we
have subsequently ascertained that
President Clinton did not complete his
degree.

The opinions expressed in Inspires are


those of the contributors, and are not
necessarily shared by the DPIR or the
University of Oxford.

Follow us on twitter

@Politics_oxford
3

Welcome

In his final year as Head of Department, Stephen Whitefield


sets out some of the achievements and highlights of the past
year and outlines the challenges ahead
It has been an extraordinary year of activity as
we have moved forward to implement the key
aims and objectives outlined in my Welcome
in last years edition of Inspires: implementation
of the size and shape review; preparation for
the Research Excellence Framework 2014
(REF); and broadening financial support for our
most outstanding research students to provide
them with full funding, including fees and living
expenses. All of these goals are linked in our
minds under the rubric, recruiting and retaining
the best. Our experience in the last year
has shown the possibilities and challenges of
achieving this.
To recap, we conducted a size and shape
review of our academic staff profile in 2012
which was intended to make sure we are
making the best use of our resources and
concentrating them on areas of greatest
academic need we should be researching the
most important and significant questions and
educating and training our students to deal
with them. The review indicated that we had
scope for some reduction in our overall size,
which could be achieved through retirements
and departures of staff to other universities.
In line with our main strategic priority, we
decided to apply all financial savings from
any staff reduction to our funds for graduate
studentships.
At the same time, we still had significant
recruitment needs. In fact, despite a slight
reduction in our total complement, we have
filled seven permanent positions in the
Department this last year: Dan Butt at Balliol
and Zofia Stemplowska at Worcester strengthen
our capacity in political theory; Todd Hall at St
Annes gives us expertise in the international
relations of China; Ben Ansell at Nuffield and
Jane Gingrich at Magdalen bring additional
strength in comparative political economy;
Elias Dinas at Brasenose (from next January
1st) provides great knowledge of European
politics as well as depth in methodology and
David Doyle at St Hughs works on the politics
of Latin America. And we have one more
permanent position under advertisement in an
area crucial to the training of our graduates in
qualitative methods. When you add all these
to our existing complement, and the many
other appointments of early career researchers
to post-doctoral appointments, we believe
we have the strongest and largest group of
scholars of politics and international relations
anywhere in Europe if not the world, a view that
we expect to be confirmed in the REF.

How did the modest reduction in our permanent


faculty translate into support for doctoral
students? The financial savings amounted to
200K. On top of that, thanks to the generosity
of donors at Brasenose and at Christ Church
with the assistance of matching funding from
Oxford University Press, two of our permanent
positions were fully endowed. We used
the salary savings there also to bolster our
studentship funds. When added to our existing
resources devoted to graduate funding, we
were able to allocate in 2013-14 fully 621K
of financial support for doctoral studentships.
Not only that, but working collaboratively as
we should with Nuffield, Christ Church, Univ,
St Cross, Lady Margaret Hall and next year
Wolfson and hopefully others joint funding
arrangements mean that our support goes
much further. And when internal and college
sources are supplemented by more traditional
scholarships from the Clarendon Fund (OUP
again), the Economic and Social Research
Council and the Arts and Humanities Research
Council, we have moved to a point where 43
of the c. 250 doctoral students in Politics and
International Relations are fully funded. This is
a great achievement.
So, I hope you will see that we have
demonstrated our own commitment to doing
what we can on our side. Why then will you
find us continuing to seek your help to raise
yet more money in support of academic posts
and student funding? The most important
reason is that our academic competitors keep
raising the bar to our success in recruiting
and retaining the best. I am not complaining:
competition can be a great boost to progress
in our profession. But we are determined
that we will not be left behind. Despite our
achievements in recruiting outstanding new
faculty, therefore, we have to admit that we
lost some to other universities that we would
have preferred to keep. And despite building
our studentship pot substantially, we remain
behind the great US universities and now some
European ones too which are able to fully fund
ALL of their doctoral students and for longer
periods of time. I find it galling to think that we
cant do the same. But to do so, we need to
add your help to our own efforts.
As the successes above in funding posts and
studentships make clear, by far the best way to
approach fundraising is jointly with colleges. In
my first Head of Department (HoD) Welcome
to Inspires, I made clear that the Department is
found in every college in the University where
Politics is taught. And increasingly colleges

and the Department are working together. I


mentioned two schemes above that provide
wonderful possibilities for you as alumni to
maximise the value of your donations. Both
are matching funding schemes supported
by Oxford University Press. The first is the
Teaching Fund, which is intended to fully endow
academic posts, where OUP will contribute
800K of the 2 million endowment. The
second is the graduate studentship initiative, in
which OUP will provide funds to match either
capital or five-year spend-down donations to
provide full funding for more of our doctoral
students. We are working with colleges to
expand on our successes in these schemes. If
you would like to find out more about how you
can help us work with your college on these
initiatives, please contact us or follow this
link: http://www.campaign.ox.ac.uk/priorities/
find_your_priority/politics.html
We have a number of events planned this year
that we hope you will attend. These build on the
really successful occasions last year. We had a
great evening and dinner at Balliol last March
that was followed by a days discussion in the
Department on the subject, More Europe,
Less Europe, No Europe. We intend to follow
this up on 30 November with another day of
serious political discussion on Constitutional
Change and Political Theory. Details of how
to register will be online shortly. Some of you
will also know about an initiative jointly run
by the Department and Pembroke College to
commemorate the intellectual and political
legacy of Senator Fulbright: the Department
hopes to endow a permanent Fulbright Chair in
International Relations. In order to highlight the
initiative, DPIR holds an annual lecture in May
and will this year participate in the University
Alumni Weekend with a lecture on The
Arrogance of Power by Professor Sir Adam
Roberts (please see details on the back cover
of this magazine).Do come along to that.
This will be my last HoD Welcome to Inspires.
My successor is Liz Frazer the Departments
fourth HoD who will take over on 1 January
2014. I wish her all the very best. It has been
an honour for me to serve as HoD for the last
three-and-a-bit years. I feel proud of what we
have accomplished, in particular in starting the
process of engaging with you, our alumni. I
very much appreciate all of the support you
have given.
Stephen Whitefield
Head of Department, Professor of Politics,
University Lecturer in Politics,
Rhodes Pelczynski Tutorial Fellow in Politics,
Pembroke College

Researching the

Republic

Karma Nabulsi discusses her research into the theory and practice of popular
sovereignty, revolution and the foundation of democratic republics
My research explores the theory and practice
of popular sovereignty, and the accompanying
themes that underpin the establishment of
democratic republics through revolutions. This
research, and the study of popular sovereignty
in both its national and international aspects,
has been developed in a number of ways over
the past few years at the Department and
further afield: in collaborative work with other
universities, in individual scholarship, and in
various academic programmes.
This research has a number of components.
The first is foundational and philosophical, and
some of my recent writing relies on the work
of Jean-Jacques Rousseau in this regard. Last
year was the bicentennial of his birth, and I
contributed a lecture on Rousseau to the annual
Oxford Amnesty Human Rights series, recently
published in Self-Evident Truths? Human Rights
and the Enlightenment (2012). I also gave the
keynote lecture at Rousseaus Republics, the
17th Biennial Colloquium of the Rousseau
Association, and contributed to an international
colloquium in Geneva on Rousseau, La
Rpublique, shortly to be published by Honor
Champion, in its series Les Dix-Huitimes
Sicles.
At a recent plenary lecture at the LSEs
ASEN annual conference on Revolutions and
Nationalism, my central argument was that
the recent revolutions in the Arab world are
rooted in the revolutionary tradition of popular
sovereignty, which can be traced primarily in
the regions own rich political history over the
19th and 20th centuries, and is also articulated
in the writings of Rousseau, and in the founding
practices of republican associations creating
republics in 19th century Europe (the latter of
which I have spent some time exploring).
Another aspect of this research concerns a
specific type of national political design that can
be broadly defined as the internationalisation
and institutionalisation of popular sovereignty.
It is a reflection on how this principle of popular
sovereignty can be first understood and then
applied, in both academic and policy terms,
by reforming or creating specific national and
international institutions, while working with
existing ones in short, as in the classic socialdemocratic formula, establishing the embryo of
the new in the frame of the old. Another strand
of this research explores the practices the
organising tools, networks, and associations
- that are at the heart of creating popular
revolutions to institute republics.
Whilst the universality of the principles
behind revolutions is rarely contested, and
is now enshrined in international charters
and universal declarations, the complex set
of practices needed to achieve those rights

and which I advance are also universal


are seldom studied. These are the activities
that create revolutions for the establishment
of popular sovereignty, and are repeated
whenever and wherever organisational work
to create such revolutions is undertaken.
Accordingly, my research traces these actions
in some comparative detail, in the sense of
how they came together to form a concrete
tradition. In the language of 18th century
republicans in revolutionary America, France,
and elsewhere, engaging in this practice was
defined as practising the virtues: in other
words, engaging in collective work for the
public (or common) good, with the goal of
creating republics where every citizen lives both
equal and free, based on the principle of the
sovereignty of the people.

These themes have been developed through


three academic programmes over the past
decade. The first was the British Academy
sponsored programme established in 2000
entitled Republicans Without Republics:
National and International Networks, lasting four
years, which created a network of scholars
philosophers, political scientists, and historians
who examined the foundational concepts
and constructs of republics as they were being
made, by reviewing revolutionary quests for
the establishment of democratic republics
in 18th and 19th century Europe through its
protagonists, traditions, and international
networks and associations. Its final phase
culminated in a framework which included the
Arab World, the Americas and Africa, and from
the 18th century to the present.

How do revolutions begin, and who begins


them? Overthrowing tyranny, classically
defined, and installing the principles of liberty,
equality, justice, and popular sovereignty in their
variety of forms: these are some of the ends
of revolutions, whatever the country, region,
or era. Less appreciated is that the means
employed to create revolutions are always the
same as well, and are just as universal. The
vocabulary once commonly used to describe
these methods has now been forgotten by the
very democracies that had relied upon them
for their own creation. Gone with this language
is an appreciation of the methods and tools
required. By restoring the language, therefore,
a clear thread can be drawn from past
revolutionaries to the present ones, making this
tradition of revolutionary practice both visible
and concrete.

The second was a large programme conducted


under the title Civitas: Foundations for
Participation of Palestinian Refugees and
Exile Communities. This project the first of
its kind to be conducted in the Arab region
explored mechanisms through which
Palestinian refugees could achieve democratic
representation. Using a participatory method
that relied on refugee mobilisation in its design,
and the principles of popular sovereignty and
the social contract, this work was carried out
in meetings involving thousands of refugees
in 26 countries. It resulted in an extensive
Register that constitutes the standard
voice on Palestinian refugees, their popular
organising, their civic, social, and economic
status, and their aspirations for freedom and
representation.

Throughout history, revolutionaries engaged


in what they described as a battle to create
republics. The main tool they used was to
practise thoughtfully and purposefully an
array of republican virtues. Indeed the exact
form of liberty they sought depended entirely
on these virtues, and their ability to develop
and rely on them. Those engaged in this
endeavour for the common good needed to
acquire the imagination to live as free people
as republicans well before they had the
necessary instruments to install the institutions
that would protect this freedom, and establish
laws and rights for all. It was not sufficient
to declare republicanism as an intellectual,
philosophical, or even moral position. Rather,
republicanism was understood by them as
embarking upon a set of actions, a world of
being and interconnectedness, that would first
build and then maintain the institutions that
guaranteed their freedom. Their actions, and
the republics they built through them, were only
possible due to a commitment to practicing
these virtues.

Overthrowing
tyranny and
installing the
principles of liberty,
equality, justice,
and popular
sovereignty
these are some
of the ends of
revolutions

The third is Teaching Contemporary Palestinian


Political History (TCPH), a British Academy
sponsored programme providing an intellectual
framework for the history and politics of the
Palestinian revolution, and which is currently in
its fourth and final year. Launched in October
2009, TCPH features collaboration between
the University of Oxford, and universities
in Palestine and further afield in the Arab
world. It has created an online curriculum for
university students in Arabic and English on
Palestinian political history of the revolutionary
decades, with a focus on civic practices and
organisational processes in the 1960s, 70s and
80s. The platform relies on primary documents,
oral history of the main protagonists, and other
rare materials, and will go online for students,
teachers and the broader public in 2013.

Karma Nabulsi
University Lecturer in International Relations,
Fellow in Politics, St Edmund Hall

... if we do take impact


seriously, then the blog post
is arguably an important form
or genre in its own right ...

shall we blog?
Stuart White discusses the potential of academic
blogging to increase the impact of research by
deepening democratic debate

There is a lot of discussion today amongst


academics about something called impact.
One possible way in which academics can
try to make their work accessible to a wider
audience, increasing its impact, is by exploring
the possibilities opened up by blogging and social
media.
In the past getting a message out to a wider
audience about ones research might require
placing an article in a newspaper or persuading
a broadcaster to run an interview. These remain
important ways of disseminating research. But
blogging and social media offer another, more
direct and decentralised route to dissemination.
It is also complementary to the more traditional
routes. An article that achieves some attention
via social media might well be taken up by the
mainstream media.
DPIR set up a blog site jointly with the
Department of Politics and International Studies
at Cambridge University in 2010, Politics in
Spires (http://politicsinspires.org/). It publishes
3-4 articles per week during the academic year.
Readership has steadily grown to over 1,000 per
week. Another academic blog site, which shows
what can be done, is the LSEs British Policy and
Politics site, one of a number of LSE-based blogs
(http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/).

An individual blog post offers a relatively short,


but informed, discussion of a political topic.
However, some blog sites attempt broader and
deeper analysis by running a series of articles
around a related topic. Politics in Spires has been
moving in this direction over the past year. One
example, which I have helped to edit, is the series
Democratic Wealth.

in the US, Spain and France, as well as nonacademics. The series has been hosted jointly
by Politics in Spires and by an external, nonacademic site, openDemocracy (http://www.
opendemocracy.net/). This editorial partnership
offers a way of maximising the reach of the series,
and hopefully each site can help more generally
to draw readership to the other.

Democratic Wealth is an attempt to bring some


recent developments in academic political theory
into a discussion of political economy. Within
political theory, there has been a revival of interest
in recent years in the tradition or traditions of civic
republicanism (see also the article in this issue
of Inspires by Karma Nabulsi on her research).
What, if anything, can this tradition, or set of
traditions, contribute to contemporary thinking
about the relationships between politics, society
and the economy?

There is perhaps a sense amongst some


academics that blogging is not a terribly serious
exercise. The serious stuff is the monograph
or the journal article. But if we do take impact
seriously, then the blog post is arguably an
important form or genre in its own right.

For example, what does republican thinking about


the nature of freedom imply for the objectives of
economic policy? Is a republican conception of
active citizenship consistent with contemporary
commercial societies? Is a commercial republic
possible and, if so, what kind of institutions would
it have?
The series has included contributions not only
from UK academics, but also from academics

In addition, blogs can help to develop


conversations in ways that can then feed back
into the writing of things like journal articles and
monographs. There is of course always the
potential for discussion prompted by comments
threads and responses on social media. A
series editor can also try to prompt discussion
by requesting contributors not just to state their
own position but to take account of earlier posts.
Debates that are latent in the academic literature
can be brought out.
Implicit in what I have said thus far, however, is
a view about what impact itself might be. It is all
too easy to fall into a trap of thinking that impact

must mean conveying an idea to policymakers


which then results in a policy. Impact, on this
model, tends to get reduced to inuence on what
government does.
Influence on a governments actions can be a
perfectly admirable thing to achieve. Ive certainly
tried to have such influence myself. Ill probably
try again.
But there are some obvious worries with the idea
that academics ought to orient their research
towards having impact only in this sense. The
process of policymaking in government is neither
that of an ideal deliberative democracy nor that of
a rational, scientific technocracy. Unequal power
relations in the wider society, ideology, partisan
and personal self-interest, along with many other
factors, shape this process so that what comes
out as policy is hardly a pure reflection of the
innate quality of ideas.
To expect academics to achieve impact only in
this sense, therefore, is to encourage academics
to shape their research in ways that potentially
inappropriately give weight to existing power
relations. Rather than enhancing the academic
enterprise, this threatens its integrity. Insofar
as it helps to reproduce existing perspectives
and affirm existing power structures, it arguably
also runs counter to the kind of challenge and

contestation that a robust democracy requires.


One step forward from this model is to recognise,
as many academics do, that policy is not only
something made by central governments but by
devolved and local governments and groups in
civil society.
Taking a further step, towards what might be
termed a democratic model of impact, we
conceive of our research as addressed also to
the wider citizenry in whom sovereignty ultimately
and properly resides. This research offers fellow
citizens resources which they can use to inform
and deepen their deliberation and debate. This
can mean putting forward ideas that challenge
current public opinion. Accordingly, with the
democratic model, we do not think of impact only
as polices that institutions adopt, but as how one
affects the terms of public discussion. Impact is a
matter of contribution to public debate.
Blogging is an obvious way of trying to offer ones
research as a resource for deeper, more informed
public debate. Done well, it can potentially offer
a way of enriching both academic research and
democratic politics.
How do we do it well? On that, we are all still on
a learning curve. Well be discussing this within
DPIR. Watch this space.

Please visit the Democratic Wealth series at


http://politicsinspires.org/

qr

Contributions and comments welcome:


oxbridge.blog@gmail.com
Follow us on twitter
@PoliticsinSpire

Stuart White
Director, Public Policy Unit,
University Lecturer in Politics,
Tutorial Fellow in Politics, Jesus College

Conor ONeill

Life

after
History and Politics

Luke Tryl
Magdalen College
2005

It was great to be part


of a team coming up
with ideas that not
only ended up in party
manifestos, but in some
cases actually became
Government policy.

10

One of the things I enjoyed most about studying


History and Politics was just how varied the
degree could be. One day youd be studying
Aristotles Politics, the next looking at the
influence of John Winthrop in Colonial America
and after that, how elections in Belgium differ
from those in Mexico. Despite being a relatively
new degree, I really thought History and Politics
gave me the best of both worlds. Im sure
were all guilty of looking back through rosetinted spectacles (I still get nightmares about
finals!), but its only now, having left, that I truly
appreciate the amazing opportunities I had
access to at the time. One aspect of my degree
in particular stands out for me when I was able
to interview not one, but two US Supreme Court
Justices for my undergraduate thesis.
Whilst I know we were all told, repeatedly, that
we were there to study for our degree, the
flexibility of History and Politics did give me a
chance to put what I was learning into some
sort of practice, and I was lucky enough to be
elected President of the Oxford Union. Despite
the stress of termly elections and politicking
my time at the Union has left me with some
fantastic memories, including chairing debates
involving members of the Cabinet and Shadow
Cabinet and hosting speakers as varied as
Hamid Karzai and Russell Brand.
Since leaving Ive tried to make the best use
of what I learned at Oxford in the real world.
Straight after finishing my degree I went to work
for the think-tank Reform in their education
team. In the run up to the 2010 general election,
Reform was trying to persuade the major
political parties to adopt its ideas. It was great

Since it was introduced in 1999,


History and Politics* has been a
popular choice of undergraduate
joint degree, with applicant numbers
rising year on year. Three History and
Politics alumni share with Inspires
readers reflections on how their
course has influenced them in their
careers to date.

to be part of a team coming up with ideas that


not only ended up in party manifestos, but
in some cases actually became Government
policy. I also worked for a public affairs firm,
helping a range of clients make sense of the
political system and raise their profile in the
media, the most interesting being a political
prisoner in Russia. We helped to raise the
profile of the human rights abuses in his case
to politicians and journalists. I now work for
Stonewall, Europes largest gay equality charity,
doing a mix of policy and campaign work. As
Im sure you can imagine it certainly keeps me
busy! Again Im lucky enough to have found a
job which is so varied day by day. In the same
week this year, I spent a day down in Cornwall
speaking to a packed town hall meeting about
the importance of equal marriage, did a radio
interview about levels of homophobic bullying
and also spoke to 400 trainee teachers about
tackling this same problem. Ive been really
lucky in being able to carry on using the lessons
I learned from History and Politics in my day to
day work.
In fact, its not just the subject knowledge that
Ive found useful. Whilst, fingers crossed, the 5am
essay crises have been left behind (somewhere
outside exam schools) other habits I picked up
have stayed with me. For instance, I now find it
difficult to get phased having to think on my feet in
a meeting or conference after having spent three
years trying to defend a tutorial essay against
some of the leading academics in the field. So for
everything Ive done so far, the preparation my
degree gave me has been invaluable and I think,
and hope, that itll continue to be that way for the
foreseeable future.

*Editors note: Before 2007 the degree was named Modern History and Politics.

Wadham College
2000
MSt 2003-4

Although there is
much of my job that
is either technical or
highly specialised,
Ive always felt my
degree has enduring
relevance and utility.

Raluca Petre

The Queens College


2008

Thinking academically
about a range of directors
and films has shown
me the potential of cinema
to help us understand
our behaviours and make
sense of our surroundings.

When I saw that History and Politics was being


offered as a course at Oxford, I was sure that
it was what I wanted to study, and I have never
regretted that decision. The opportunity both to
develop different but complementary methods
of understanding and analysis and to draw from
such a range of subjects and periods to study
was an exciting one, and across the three years
I and my fellow MHPists often found ourselves
hopping back and forth between the PPE and
History fraternity, or holding the line between
them. I was lucky enough to be funded by the
Hudson Trust to complete an MSt, researching
terrorist strategy in Northern Ireland, and the
interdisciplinary work I had done during my
MHP degree was invaluable in conducting very
recent historical research.
I went to Oxford on a Royal Navy University
Cadetship, and so after finishing my Masters
it was back to sea. I am a Warfare Officer,
responsible for a variety of operational and
management activities onboard ships, from
navigation to HR, and Ive served in most
corners of the globe. Patrolling the Strait of
Hormuz or the Falkland Islands certainly gives
some rather immediate context to IR theory.
Although, clearly, there is much of my job that
is either technical or highly specialised, Ive
always felt my degree has enduring relevance
and utility. Much of the work the navy does,

Following my graduation in 2011, I went on


to do a Masters in Film Studies at Kings
College London. The link between History
and Politics and film had become increasingly
apparent to me during my time at Oxford. At
first, film acted as a relief from the issues that
I was dealing with in my essays; I had always
been into film as a hobby and, in search for
extracurriculars at Oxford, I came to edit and
write for the film section of the Oxford Student
and helped run the Magdalen Film Society.
However, by my third year I realised that what
I had found most engaging in my essays was
also influencing the way I thought about film. I
became really interested in political philosophy
and Adam Swifts Political Theory tutorials not
only pushed me to discipline my thoughts but
also introduced me to the idea of adaptive
preferences in feminist theory. I then found
out that psychoanalysis and poststructuralist
thought in the arts expanded on that exact
concept with regard to films. History and
Politics (H&P) also allowed me to experiment
with various approaches. In a history of art
module, I learnt how to think about images as
a language and the way in which they influence
perceptions of reality in a certain period.
H&P was about not settling; about connecting
the apparent and the superficial, with their
roots, context and implications. It was also
about trying to understand the worlds of
others in order to understand oneself, ones
preconceptions and preferred arguments.
Good films usually try to do that too, and,
when analysing what makes a film effective
or not, its formal devices are contextualised
in relation to its story, other films, its mode of

day to day, is diplomatic in nature, and


appreciating the global and regional context in
which we are operating and the effects we are
both seeking and likely to achieve is critical to
success. Conflict is, fortunately, rare, but the
issues that often underlie it are ever changing
and if we are to apply the levers of military
power in all its forms to prevent it, we must
understand both the levers and the actors to
which they are applied.
I am frequently called upon to digest large
amounts of material, often in a constrained
timeframe, whether that be sensitive intelligence
or policy proposals, and the practical skills of
quick reading and trenchant analysis that were
developed over long nights and the odd early
morning have been much used. The service
still prizes succinct, accurate and tightly argued
writing, just as my tutors did, even if rhetorical
flourishes are not encouraged in military
signals! Ive even found myself examining the
constitutional niceties of Military Aid to the Civil
Power, working through the theoretical concept
right down to the practical implications. Im
back to sea again shortly, but in the years
that follow, as my career shifts more towards
policy from the sharp end, Ill have the chance
to blend my practical experiences with the
knowledge and skills I gained at Oxford.

production, the wider historical, political and


social issues of the country in which it was
made, theoretical texts and the viewers own
personal experiences. Thinking academically
about a range of directors and films that
previously I had not known much about has
shown me the potential of cinema to help us
understand our behaviours and make sense of
our surroundings.
I chose to study for my Masters part-time, so
that I could also pursue different things outside
academia and figure out my preferred career
path. I made a short film with my friends and
I interned for a few months in the Press and
PR department at the British Film Institute,
which was useful in confirming to me that PR
was not a path that I wanted to take. I decided
to move to Paris at the start of this year to
work in a web-based start-up that supports
art house cinema by curating selections from
film festivals and offering film professionals
exclusive access to them. The experience of
working in a compact company is rewarding.
I get to do a bit of everything, from research
about new productions and projects, to
copywriting, online content and handling rights
agreements. Working closely with professionals
in production and distribution, I also get to
understand the different roles and structures
involved in the film industry and how they work
together to create a cultural output, shaping its
form and content.
Ultimately, Im hoping to get into documentary
filmmaking back home in Romania - an exciting
way to link H&P and film.

11

Burma

on the road to democracy?


Catherine E. de Vries visits
Burma and finds a country on the
cusp of a profound transition

At the beginning of June, I had the opportunity to travel to Burma to take part in
the 2013 Meeting of the Young Global Leader (YGL) Forum of the World Economic
Forum (WEF), and the WEF East Asia. Burma is going through a remarkable
transition. The economic, political and social liberalisation process is neither a direct
response to a domestic uprising, nor a consequence of foreign intervention. Rather,
a military regime which closed the country from the outside world for more than two
decades is embarking on a journey of opening itself up to the worlds markets whilst
slowly introducing political reform. Aung San Suu Kyi, after years of house arrest,
sees her party now officially seated in parliament and new elections scheduled in
2015. Moreover the government, headed by the president Thein Sein, is negotiating
ceasefires with armed groups that fight for the rights of ethnic and religious
minorities who have historically been excluded, persecuted or marginalised. This
has all happened with astonishing speed since government reforms began in 2011.
Observing these changes from a distance, one finds oneself wondering whether
this is a genuine and lasting transformation, or just a form of window-dressing. I
headed to Burma with a dose of scepticism, reinforced by the recent attacks on the
minority communities and the on-going fighting between the army and rebel groups
in Kachin state in the North. Clearly, Burma is heading down a long and difficult path
of change which will influence generations to come.
An organisation aiding the government in the process of political, economic and
social transition is the Burma Peace Centre (MPC). Together with a small group
of YGLs, I had the opportunity to spend a day with the MPC. The MPC was
established just seven months ago by decree of President Thein Sein, with a
mandate of directly supporting the government in its tough negotiations with the
many armed groups still operating in the country. Its members are mostly Burmese
citizens that returned from exile, some previously imprisoned and involved in
rebel activities, others still blacklisted and tailed by the secret police. During my
interactions with MPC members, I was struck by their self-sacrifice, dedication, and
professionalism, and even more so by the fact that a meeting like this would have
never taken place in the political climate of just 18 months ago.
The accomplishments of the MPC are impressive, with 13 ceasefires concluded
in the past nine months. Yet the composition of the organisation does not include
representatives of some key ethnic and social groups as most members are from
the Burmese Buddhist majority and male. It is clear that the true challenges for
security and political cooperation in Burma will not only be to negotiate ceasefires,
but to start a process of reconciliation and political dialogue with minority groups,
and not just with their armed leaders. Ethnic divisions run deep in Burma. Both the
government and the Aung San Suu Kyi-led opposition have been criticised for their
lacklustre reaction to the repeated eruptions of violence against Muslims in recent
months. It has been estimated that 200 people were killed in these incidents and
over 100,000 displaced (according to reports in the International Herald Tribune on
7 June 2013, p. 4).

12

The biggest obstacles for


Burma at the moment seem
to be the lack of social
cohesion and growing
economic inequality.

This challenge to Burmas fragile liberalisation process also troubles a young Muslim
I meet outside the Chulia Muslim Dargah Mosque on Bogyoke Aung Street in the
heart of Yangon. Most people in Burma speak English next to their respective
native tongues. There are many people in positions of power that want to turn
back time, he tells me. He goes on to add that the situation for us Muslims is
worse than before, no one stands up for us, not even the Lady (Aung San Suu Kyi
is mostly referred to as the Lady). Indeed, violence against Muslims by Burmese
Buddhist mobs is rarely officially condemned. He urges me to tell people in your
country about the situation with Muslims here - a promise I hope to keep with this
contribution.
Another challenge is brought to my attention by a taxi driver who, while pointing
at the villas surrounding the Inlay Lake in Yangon, tells me about his dire living
conditions and the growing inequality of wealth in his country. Looking out of the
car window onto the large villas with expensive cars and security in the driveway
makes this picture crystal clear. Existing research on political transitions and
democratisation tells us that nations that grow faster do not show a greater
tendency to become democratic or consolidate already established democratic
institutions, and that an unequal distribution of wealth may have detrimental
effects. Consequently, it remains to be seen if Burma stays on the path of elite-led
economic liberalisation currently characterised by rising inequality and widespread
corruption (see Transparency International rating for 2012*), or if ordinary citizens
from a variety of different ethnic and religious backgrounds may eventually get a
share of the growing wealth.
Although the liberalisation process in Burma gives reasons for optimism and hope,
the road ahead is long and difficult, and the destination uncertain. The biggest
obstacles for Burma at the moment seem to be the lack of social cohesion and
growing economic inequality. How will this government and future ones be able to
reconcile the deep ethnic and religious tensions beyond negotiating ceasefires, and
develop institutions that facilitate lasting peace and political cooperation?
And while economic development is in full swing, it is rapidly creating winners and
losers, and will likely create even bigger divisions in the future. This situation may
carry the seeds for future political conflict and social unrest. No quick fixes for social
divisions and economic inequality exist, and their root causes are utterly complex.
Moreover, ethnic tensions and inequality are key challenges, not only for Burma,
but increasingly for many advanced industrial democracies around the globe. If
the people and elites of Burma are able to develop institutions and dialogues that
ensure social, political and economic sustainability, established democracies might
take lessons from this beautiful country.
* http://www.transparency.org/cpi2012/results

Catherine E. de Vries
Professor of European Politics and
Government in association with
Lincoln College
Member, Young Global Leader Forum,
World Economic Forum

13

SOFT POWER
moves to the people
John Worne asks whether
governments have lost the
monopoly on soft power
Joseph Nyes classic definition of soft power coined in 1990 is The
ability to attract and co-opt rather than coerce, use force or give money
as a means of persuasion*. In sum and in an ideal world - sharing
culture and building trade are better international relations interventions
than firing bullets or sending aid.

business/innovation, government and education. I think thats nearly


right. But the weight and impact of these pieces of the jigsaw is
changing and there is a very big one missing.

Of course, we dont live in an ideal world. No-one should underestimate


the significance of hard power or international development assistance.
Military intervention, diplomacy, sanctions and subsidies, as well as aid,
are as vital to international relations, geopolitics and peoples lives now
as they ever have been.

To focus first on one bit that is changing. Culture is big and getting
bigger. A great deal of a countrys soft power lives in its cultural and
educational institutions, brands and icons. In the UKs case the BBC,
the great galleries, museums, universities and theatres, but also the
Premier League, the Royal Family, Team GB and Paralympics GB,
Jaguar, Burberry and the celebration of UK life which was Danny Boyles
Olympic opener.

But the problem for many governments outside closed states and
dictatorships - is that these days more and more connections between
countries happen outside, even despite, governments, not between or
because of them.

And here the UK has a real comparative advantage. We have a resilient


and cost effective model: cultural institutions with mixed economy
funding some public funding and an entrepreneurial approach to
earning and partnership with great commercial brands and sponsors.

And in the last five years, in particular, the global explosion of Internet
connectivity and social media increasingly means that even the bits that
were once potentially controllable broadcast and media are now
increasingly for and from the people not by or through the state.

Unlike for example China or France, who commit very large-scale public
funding to culture and language promotion, the UKs mixed economy
approach at its best keeps our great arts, educational and cultural
institutions to their public service mission through Royal Charters and
some state funding. This helps to keep UK culture and UK soft power
evolving and innovating, not limited in ambition by public money alone.

My contention is that soft power these days is much less the property
and tool of governments and much more the product of the actions
of people and cultural institutions. This makes it no less powerful, but
much harder to wield, as it is the sum of how a nation is rather than
how it might like to be seen. Indeed, even attributing this power to a
specific nation or nation-state becomes more complex as actors on
social media do not necessarily see themselves, and might not always
be perceived by others, as straightforwardly representatives of the
nation or state to which they belong.
The Institute for Government most closely captures my view on the main
elements which together constitute soft power: culture, diplomacy,

And as we have seen in the UK and in other parts of the world via twitter
storms, wikileaks and flashmobs the boundaries and power of social
media are uncontrolled and uncontrollable by governments. People can
now connect and create content, share ideas and learn about each other
at the speed of light. Sweden as a nation and Google as a company lead
the public and private charge for a free Internet. But whoever wins, the
genie of social media is out of the bottle and wont be put back in.
As the UKs international culture and education body the British Council
has always been for and from the people of the UK. Our public service
mission has always been to increase the number of people around the
world who speak English, have studied in or with UK institutions and
universities and are open to and attracted to UK culture and people.
But thanks to digital learning and social media the scale at which we can
now do it dwarfs what was possible ten years ago. As a small example,
our digital LearnEnglish sites now attract hundreds of millions from
Afghanistan to Zimbabwe where previously we could only reach or teach
thousands face to face. Over a million fans learn together on our Middle
East Facebook English site. The global demand for English, UK Education
and UK culture has never been greater than today.
So much more of soft power in the 21st century is people power the
power of people to vote with their feet, move directly or virtually where
they want and gravitate towards people, places, opportunities, ideas and
creative content which are more internationally and instantly mobile than
ever.
And this is where a great deal of the UKs power of attraction now lies in
our comparative openness, creativity, the content we create, the breadth
of artistic expression, our diversity and plurality. According to Monocle
magazine and the Institute for Government, 2012 put the UK on top of the
world for soft power. It is the UKs people and cultural institutions which
will keep us there.

Monocle
Soft Power Survey 2012

01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

UK
USA
Germany
France
Sweden
Japan
Denmark
Switzerland
Australia
Canada
South Korea
Norway
Finland
Italy
Netherlands
Spain
Brazil
Austria
Belgium
Turkey

Please see a lm about the Top 20 at


http://monocle.com/lm/affairs/soft-power-survey-2012

This text is based on a speech in January 2013 by


John Worne at an Inter-Parliamentary Union Peers and
MPs debate on Soft Power at Westminster Hall

John Worne, PPE (Jesus College, 1987)


Director of Strategy, British Council
Prior to the British Council John worked around
the world in international telecommunications
and at the centre of UK Government

But the big missing piece of the Institute for Governments soft power
model, I believe, is people. A great deal of soft power is now created
directly and daily by the ordinary and extraordinary people of the
world teachers, artists, sportspeople, young people, policymakers,
parliamentarians, commentators and raconteurs to name a few.
What we blog, tweet, tag, snap, post, comment on and curate speaks
volumes for who we are and reaches all four corners of the world
through diasporas driven by the twin social media currencies of interest
and followership.
*Soft Power: the Means to Success in World Politics, Joseph S. Nye Jr., (Public Affairs, 2004)

14

The UK pavilion at the World Expo in Shanghai, 2010

15

GrADUAte FUnDInG

Keeping the subjects


lifeblood owing:
funding our postgraduates

David Hine explains DPIRs


strategy to increase funding for
graduate study
For PPE students a few decades ago, DPIR
postgraduate students were perhaps perceived
as a small, barely visible group, usually writing
DPhils. Postgraduate students mostly harboured
aspirations to become academics, though not all
managed it. Some helped with undergraduate
tutorials, and were often very good at it, even
on rather little training. But the postgraduate
programme was an add-on to the main
(undergraduate-focused) work of the then SubFaculty of Politics.
Today, the world of postgraduate students has
been transformed and professionalised. We
have many more postgraduates than in the
past, relative to undergraduates, and they
go on to various careers. Most come initially
to study for one of several taught Masters
degrees the one-year MSc or the two-year
MPhil with a proportion going on to do doctoral
work thereafter. A minority come to start on
a doctorate immediately, but will have done a
Masters elsewhere.
This evolution is common to other departments
in Oxford, and is paralleled in most good
universities. What explains it, and what are its
implications for DPIR specifically?

16

Firstly, many career pathways actively demand


the extra training and the sharper analytical
capacities that come from postgraduate
training. Rigorous training in research methods
is the essence of the first year of postgraduate
studies in the Department. It is highly valued in
government, policy-making bodies in the notfor-profit sector, international organisations, and
anywhere where employees need to be able to
model social processes, and gather and interpret
data robustly, whether for public policy, advocacy
or commercial or financial strategy.

Oxford now competes for top doctoral students


not just with other UK universities, but with the
best in North America, and with good universities
in Europe and Asia whose postgraduate
programmes are increasingly taught in English.

Secondly, as has long been the case in the


natural sciences, scholarship and research
today advance through collaborative effort and
teamwork. The research in the DPIR described
in this and previous editions of Inspires is vivid
testimony to teamwork. Some of the most
important members of such teams are doctoral
students. University reputations are built today
not just on undergraduate teaching but also on
research and scholarship, and on postgraduate
training. This is a normal expectation of a modern
university environment, and we cannot recruit and
retain the best academics and sustain Oxfords
reputation in Politics and International Relations
unless we provide all three parts of the triad.

This target of five prestigious


doctoral awards is only the
beginning if we are to put support
for postgraduate funding on a
proper footing in our Department.

Every year the Department receives applications


from large numbers of excellent applicants. But
as the recruitment year proceeds, many of those
to whom we offer places either cannot raise the
funds (this includes some of the very strongest)
or get generous funding elsewhere. Some top US

institutions do not expect to offer doctoral places


without also providing full funding: something
Oxford can only dream of.
This is by far the most serious challenge the
Department faces. For all the controversy
over tuition fees, Oxfords undergraduates can
confidently be recruited on a completely needsblind basis. Few UK applicants turn an Oxford
PPE or History/Politics place down in favour of
another UK university. Not so at postgraduate
level. There, competition is ferocious, and it all
depends on money.
For home students the two main research
councils (the ESRC and the AHRC) fund a small
number of students, but the allocation process
is highly unpredictable. Oxford has its own
Clarendon awards scheme (generously supported
by OUP) to finance a limited number of fee
remissions. Some colleges have funds for living
awards, and in some cases also for fee remission.
But the result is a messy patchwork.
The University is determined to address this
problem, and so is the Department of Politics
and International Relations. One encouraging
incentive is Oxfords recently-launched Graduate

Scholarship Matched Fund, which enables us to


leverage gifts received from donors to support
graduate scholarships with matching funds
allocated from University income in a 60:40
donor:match ratio (see www.campaign.ox.ac.
uk/priorities/students/grad_matched_fund.
html). In essence, if the Department of Politics
and International Relations wants to offer five
two-year doctoral awards each year valued at
about 25k p.a., the cost of this (250k p.a.)
capitalised as endowment, would be around
7m. So we as a Department would need to
raise around 4m to draw down around 3m
from the Matched Fund.

research. We would like to hear from you. We


hope to see you at the alumni events in Oxford.
Please contact me (david.hine@politics.ox.ac.uk)
or the Departmental editor of Inspires Kate Candy
(kate.candy@politics.ox.ac.uk) if you think you
can help or if you want more information.

This modest target of five prestigious doctoral


awards is only the beginning if we are to put
support for postgraduate funding on a proper
footing in our Department. Over the long term,
to compete internationally, we need to secure
support for a much larger number of awards,
including those at Masters level.

David Hine
CUF University Lecturer in Politics,
Student, Christ Church

Over coming months you will hear more from


us. We shall be posting our business plan for
graduate support on our website, and telling
alumni much more about the Departments
postgraduate programmes and its students

Graduate students are the engine of research.


They go on to make an important contribution to
the worldwide economy and society, as leaders
in their fields and in developing the frontiers of
knowledge. This is a hugely worthwhile cause,
and vital to Oxfords future competitiveness in
Politics and International Relations.

Please find further information about


our graduate programmes at
www.politics.ox.ac.uk/index.php/why-studywith-us/why-study-with-us.html
Please find further information about
giving to DPIR at
www.politics.ox.ac.uk/index.php/alumnidevelopment/alumni-development.html

17

Not as easy as it sounds

Typical ethical problems

So it is with humanitarian work in armed conflict.


In many ways, it is simple a straightforward
bit of practical morality moving stuff from a to b.
But, in other ways, providing aid ethically and
well is hard indeed. This is why researchers at
DPIR are working directly with several of the
worlds largest aid agencies to develop a better
understanding of the ethics of humanitarian aid.
This is important to help improve aid strategies
on the ground. It is also essential to keep the
public realistically informed about the challenges
and progress of humanitarian aid, and what
they can expect as a reasonable return on their
investment.

In our research so far, we have identified


several main areas of humanitarian work where
humanitarian agencies have long reported
recurring ethical problems. Some of these are
summarised and illustrated in the following list.

Many thousands of people are saved from


death, destitution, hunger and disease every
year by emergency programmes that aid civilians
in war. Humanitarian aid has mushroomed
in recent years. Aid budgets are bigger than
ever, topping $17bn in 2011, and there are
now an estimated 4,400 agencies working in
humanitarian aid.
Humanitarian aid makes a big impact every year
and is emerging as something of a global safety
net for people enduring armed conflicts and
major disaster. At the same time, humanitarian
agencies and their critics are rightly aware of
a range of political and ethical problems in
providing humanitarian aid. This means that
humanitarian action is not as simple as TV
advertisements make it out to be and as we, the
donors, might wish it to be.

The

Ethics
Humanitarian Aid

Humanitarian principles
Humanitarian aid in armed conflict is governed
by international humanitarian law, refugee law
and by self-regulating principles agreed by
humanitarian agencies that are based on the
fundamental principles of the Red Cross and
Red Crescent Movement.

of

Hugo Slim considers the challenges


and dilemmas facing the global
humanitarian aid sector
What happens when we give money to humanitarian agencies
appealing for funds to support their work in conflicts like Syria?
Their advertisements make things sound so easy: we send money
to Oxfam, Save the Children or the Red Cross and they buy food,
medicines or water equipment and get them to people in need.

It all seems like a very simple and satisfactory ethical transaction.


But, as each one of us knows, helping people is actually quite
complicated. This is probably the main reason why so few of us take
homeless people into our homes. If we did, what might begin as
an apparently simple moral proposition could soon become a very
difficult and protracted moral challenge.

18

International humanitarian law, in the Geneva


Conventions, requires the protection of civilians
and allows for humanitarian aid of all kinds to be
provided by neutral and impartial humanitarian
organisations. This impartiality is important.
Parties to a conflict can refuse access to
humanitarian aid if it gives unfair military or
economic advantage to the enemy.

Recognising the difficult ethical


aspects of humanitarian work
allows agencies and the
public to discuss aid
more realistically and creatively.

Equity and fairness


In conflicts where access is often blocked and
restricted, agencies often struggle, through
no fault of their own, to meet the needs of an
affected population fairly. In extreme situations
when needs are overwhelming, they also face
difficult questions of triage and prioritisation.
Political co-option
Agencies have to deal with warring parties eager
to use all means at their disposal to secure their
war aims. Aid is routinely under pressure in
insurgencies and counter-insurgencies. Warring
parties try to exploit the potential value of aid to
reward supportive constituencies, win the hearts
and minds of contested communities, or punish
opponents by blocking aid.
Making things worse
The way aid is given can create significant moral
hazards. Making large food distributions to
hungry families in areas dominated by predatory
armed groups can mean civilians can be robbed,
attacked, raped and killed as they return home
from distributions. Supporting the construction
and supply of camps for internally displaced
people can encourage a military policy to
dispossess and concentrate enemy populations
into humanitarian ghettos.
Paternalism and autonomy
The aid relationship can become deeply
paternalistic and reduce peoples autonomy and
power over their own lives. Finding effective and
empowering ways to work with people in crisis
is essential and hard. Some argue that aid can
generate the Samaritans dilemma though, as in
the case of debates about domestic welfare state
policies, the extent of this problem is a matter of
dispute.
Speaking out or staying to deliver
Agencies often fear becoming bystanders to
atrocity. They feel torn between going public on
the atrocities they witness, so risking obstruction
or expulsion by violating authorities, or keeping
quiet and staying on to save lives.

The great majority of humanitarian agencies


have agreed to abide by four main humanitarian
principles humanity, impartiality, neutrality
and independence as well as a range of
good practice guidelines that ensure they work
collaboratively and respectfully with individuals
and communities they are trying to help.

The lives of staff or civilians


Operating in conflict is frequently dangerous.
More than 850 aid workers have been killed
in the last ten years and hundreds kidnapped.
Staff security often makes for difficult operational
decisions that inevitably affect aid coverage.

With such an emphasis on legal and ethical


principle in humanitarian operations, it is not
surprising that humanitarian work is often deeply
challenged by conflict situations that are very far
from ideal in practice.

Aid quality
The quality of humanitarian action can be
compromised by the speed at which agencies
have to respond and the obstructions they face.
Meeting their own proper standards for health,
food, water and protection is frequently difficult.
Accountability and transparency
Getting a reliable understanding of the results of
aid programmes can be hard. Emergency context
and culture often prioritise action over reporting
and learning. But without real evidence of aid
effectiveness it becomes ethically problematic to
keep asking for more money.

These various moral problems will not come as


a surprise to anyone who has seen or imagined
the reality of trying to deliver humanitarian aid
in war. Most people who have given money to
the Red Cross in Syria will have then seen their
trucks on television stopped at road-blocks for
days at a time. Scenes like this mean that most
of us already have an innate understanding of the
ethical difficulties of humanitarian action. Yet, I
imagine that most people still want humanitarian
agencies to keep trying.
Openly recognising the difficult ethical aspects of
humanitarian work allows humanitarian agencies
and the public that supports them to discuss
humanitarian aid more realistically and creatively.
This must be a key part of the increasingly
popular discussions about respecting the Geneva
Conventions, as well as the equally pressing
political discussion about affordable aid budgets
in the UK and elsewhere.

A role for DPIR


Oxford has a long history of trying to render the
practice of war more humane and respectful of
civilians. In 1589, the migr Italian Professor of
Civil Law at Oxford, Alberico Gentili, elaborated
on the principle of civilian immunity in his De
Jure Belli. Much later in 1880, Oxford hosted
an international conference on the laws of war
which produced the so-called Oxford Manual
that notoriously but realistically began: War
holds a great place in history, and it is not to be
supposed that men (sic) will soon give it up.
In our own times, Oxford scholars like Geoffrey
Best, Barbara Harrell-Bond and Adam Roberts
have produced great works on the laws and
ethics of war, and the Refugee Studies Centre
has led the way on understanding the effects of
forced migration. And, of course, in 1942 Oxford
helped to produce Oxfam, one of the greatest
humanitarian agencies in the world.
Today, alongside our work on humanitarian ethics
in war, DPIR has a range of talented researchers
working on the ethics of robotic warfare, nuclear
proliferation, the international criminal courts role
in regulating war, the relationship between just
war theory and human rights, and the emerging
principle of an international responsibility
to protect civilians in war (R2P), by force if
necessary.
Thankfully, war has declined in recent years
but its persistence and effect on politics and
international relations makes the increasing
humanitarian regulation of conflict a continuing
priority for academic research. There is no serious
evidence that humanitarian aid prolongs war.
Instead, there is much evidence that it reduces
the severe effects of war and increases peoples
chances of survival. Because of this, a proper
discussion of the ethics of aid in war is essential,
and a book from the project will be published
later this year.
Hugo Slim
Senior Research Fellow,
Oxford Institute for Ethics, Law and Armed
Conflict, DPIR

19

reseArcH

DPIR Research: breadth and depth


Conference on Policy Learning in the EU,
May 2012

Liz Greenhalgh presents an


overview of DPIR research

The Department of Politics and International


Relations is one of the UKs leading producers of
academic research in Politics and IR, with more
than eighty academic researchers working within
a wide and diverse research programme.
The research of the Department largely
corresponds to the broad sub-disciplines of
government, international relations and political
theory. The size and breadth of the Department
allows for strength across the full range of subdisciplines together with a depth of expertise
in research methods. The Department is also
involved in a great deal of inter-disciplinary and
collaborative work covering, especially, its country
and area expertise in relation to Africa, Asia,
Latin America, Russia and Eastern Europe, North
America, Western Europe and the UK.
The Department currently hosts around 50 live
research projects funded by major research
funding organisations including the Leverhulme
Trust, the European Research Council, the British
Academy, and the Economic and Social Science
Research Council (ESRC). It also carries out work
directly for government departments, international
institutions and charitable foundations as well as
participating in international research consortia.

research centres and


Programmes
The Departments research centres and
programmes are designed to coordinate and
facilitate areas of research, linking members
into research networks, drawing in participants
from across the University and beyond, hosting
seminars and conferences, and attracting
research visitors.
The Centre for International Studies (CIS)
brings together research strengths on:
global order governance including economic
governance and international institutions;
international normative theory and emerging
powers; the changing character of war and
security; global justice; and the international
relations of the major regions in the world. Its
current research includes participation in an
international research programme on emerging

20

global powers with particular reference to Brazil,


India and China. The changing role of Europe is
the focus for a number of CIS research projects
including a programme co-ordinated jointly with
the European Studies Centre at St Antonys
College. Current interests include research on
global trade governance and regulation, global
trade ethics, and how global markets and
institutions can better serve the needs of people
in developing countries.
The Changing Character of War, a programme
from the early 1990s which is now housed at
Pembroke College, was formative. Supported
by the European Studies Centre, St Antonys
College, the programme influenced contemporary
work on Civil Resistance and Power Politics,
and resulted in a publication edited by Adam
Roberts and Timothy Garton Ash*. Expertise
in these areas has also been enriched by an
internationally-supported research programme on
exit strategies and peace building.
The Institute for Ethics, Law and Armed
Conict, which has close ties to CIS, is an
interdisciplinary centre funded by the Oxford
Martin School with the aim of strengthening
laws, norms and institutions to restrain and
prevent armed conflict. The principle of the
Responsibility to Protect, associated with the
UN, has been a focus for ELACs work, as have
debates on approaches to military ethics: whether
the use of IT-technology is compatible with
existing jus in bello norms and how to develop
ethical practice within humanitarian organisations.
The Reuters Institute for the Study of
Journalism is an international centre for the
comparative research of journalism. It hosts a
fellowship programme for visiting journalists from
around the world and runs its own research
programmes. As with all the Departments
centres, it runs a regular series of seminars,
workshops, annual conferences and debates in
collaboration with others in Oxford University and
with the global world of practice. The Institute is
taking forward research on the changing business
models of news media; on the relationship
between old and new media, and comparing
the take up and use of digital and social media
internationally. It has links with the Oxford Internet
Institute in these areas. A central theme of the

Adam Roberts at IISS


conference, Geneva

The Reuters Institute for


the Study of Journalism

institutes research is the relationship between


media and democracy in the Middle East, in
Africa and in democracies in transition. It has
connections with the large interdisciplinary DPIR
research programme on media and democracy in
ten countries in Central and Eastern Europe.
The Public Policy Unit directs policy-relevant
academic research and brings academics and
policy makers together. It has brought scrutiny to
debates on devolution; spatial issues in taxation
and public expenditure; electoral systems;
constitutional reform; church and state relations;
asset-based welfare; conditionality in welfare; and
the taxation of land value and inheritance. The
Unit specialises in high level engagement with
issues of pressing national concern in Britain.
The Department hosted the ESRCs major
research programme on Public Services from
2005 to 2010, and co-ordinated a range
of projects across the country to explore
ways of enhancing public service delivery.
The programme director has subsequently
been awarded a research professorship to
examine the process of implementing austerity
programmes in the public services. Based on an
analysis of practice over the last 35 years, this
research has drawn in a number of members
of the Department and is making a substantial
contribution to our understanding of UK executive
government.
The Centre for the Study of Social Justice
brings together a cluster of the countrys leading
political theorists working in the Department
in the broad area of contemporary political
philosophy. Research focusses on the
development of theories of justice considering
the metrics of distribution, arguments for equality,
and the implications of principles of justice for
environmental and intergenerational policies. The
Centres projects include work on the application
of political philosophy to global politics and on the
ethical issues raised by global climate change.

Research Networks
The Department runs several research
networks, such as the network on the History
of Political Theory concerned with enriching
our understanding of past political thought and
examining its relevance to political ideologies
and to contemporary debates. A network on
democratic government and inequality draws
together political theorists, political scientists
specialising in the institutions of Western states,
along with researchers working on emerging
democracies, with the aim of understanding
better the conditions for successful democratic
consolidation. The Department holds a
Comparative Political Economy research
seminar series, bringing in leading international
scholars working on the political economy of
institutions, inequality, growth, and related areas.
There is also an Oxford International History
research network: a forum for international,
global, transnational and inter-disciplinary
historians in the University.

Graduate research, DPIR

DPhil student at Politics


Colloquium, DPIR

The Oxford Spring School in Quantitative


Methods is a training programme targeted at
political and social science researchers who have
experience of quantitative research.

International Links
The Department has strong international research
links and a busy academic visitor programme,
particularly with Sciences Po Paris, with
universities in Bremen, Gttingen, Princeton and
the Central European University in Budapest.

Jeremy Waldron delivers the Inaugural


Chichele Lecture, May 2012

Liz Greenhalgh
Knowledge Exchange, DPIR

Please see further information about DPIR


research centres, programmes and projects
online at http://www.politics.ox.ac.uk/index.php/
research/research-home.html
*Civil Resistance and Power Politics,
Adam Roberts and Timothy Garton Ash (eds.),
(Oxford University Press, 2011)
Students at Oxford
Spring School

If you would like to attend research events


held by DPIR centres and programmes, please
email events@politics.ox.ac.uk to join the events
mailing list.

21

Recent
Publications

DPIR PUBLICATIONS

In this issue of Inspires we feature publications both


by DPIR alumni and by current members of DPIR.
Thank you to all alumni who have sent details of their
publications over the past year.

We welcome details of alumni publications and will publish a selection


of them in Inspires 2014, on the DPIR website and in the Alumni
Newswire newsletter, due out in December 2013.
Please send information to alumni@politics.ox.ac.uk.

citizens reactions to
european Integration
compared: overlooking europe
sophie Duchesne, elizabeth
Frazer, Florence Haegel and
virginie van Ingelgom (edited)
Palgrave Macmillan

ALUMNI PUBLICATIONS
the virtuous citizen: Patriotism
in a multicultural society
tim soutphommasane
Cambridge University Press

the House of lords 1911-2011:


A century of non-reform
chris Ballinger
Hart Publishing

The Virtuous Citizen adds to a


growing literature addressing
the challenge of how to foster
national identity in an age of
mass migration. What can and
should citizens hold in common
in a multicultural society? Does
patriotism have a role to play
and, if so, of what kind? Tim
Soutphommasane answers these
questions with a critical defence
of liberal nationalism and argues
that a love of country should be
valued together with tolerance,
mutual respect and public
reasonableness as a civic virtue.

This insightful academic study


analyses the attempts to reform
the House of Lords, beginning
with the Parliament Act of 1911
and concluding with the dropping
of the House of Lords Reform
Bill in 2012. Utilising extensive
archival sources, the study
challenges many of the current
preconceived notions about the
history of House of Lords reform
as well as perceptions about the
reasons for the success or failure
of attempts to reform.

Platos Political Philosophy


evangelia sembou
Imprint Academic
Evangelia Sembous book is an
introduction to Platos political
philosophy. It takes the Republic
as the main focus, but situates
this book in relation to Platos
other major texts in political
philosophy. It also explains the
ways in which Platos political
philosophy is related to his wider
philosophical project.

orientalism and War


Keith stanski and tarak Barkawi
(edited)
Columbia/Hurst
Orientalism pictures history
as a clash between East and
West. This Orientalist picture
is repeatedly presented by
media and other experts in their
commentaries on contemporary
politics. The papers in this
edited volume explore three
dimensions of the relations
between Orientalism and war:
how Orientalism affects the
representation of Self and Other;
how violent conict is productive
of Orientalist identities; and in
turn how Orientalism is itself
productive of war.

the Harm in Hate speech


Jeremy Waldron
Harvard University Press

COPING

WITH
CRISIS

Government Reactions to the Great Recession


Nancy Bermeo and Jonas Pontusson
Editors

coping with crisis:


Government reactions
to the Great recession
nancy Bermeo and
Jonas Pontusson
(edited)
Russell Sage Foundation

22

Using innovative focus group


methods, this book explores
the attitudes of citizens in
Britain, France and Belgium to
Europe, getting to grips with the
national and social differences
that determine perceptions
of European integration. The
book paints a picture of
indifference to and ambivalence
about the European project
among working class and
white collar people, who care
about globalisation, economic
ows, and crises of political
corruption, but overlook
Europe. That contrasts with proor anti-European elites whose
polarised views on European
issues are strongly expressed.

The US is almost alone among


Western liberal democracies in
not prohibiting hate speech oral
or written messages that incite
hatred against a person or group
on the basis of their race, religion,
sex, ethnicity or sexual orientation.
For constitutionalists, regulation
of hate speech contradicts the
First Amendment and harms a
free society. In this book Jeremy
Waldron urges Americans to
reconsider that tradition. He
argues that hate speech should
be controlled to protect minorities;
for a social environment filled
with expressions of racism,
homophobia and other forms of
bigotry sends an implicit message
to the targets of such hatred: you
can expect to face humiliation and
discrimination when you leave
your home.

Coping with Crisis offers a careful


analysis of the ways in which
policymakers across the world
responded to the current global
financial crisis and the prospect
of economic depression. It asks
why these approaches, and the
ways in which they impacted on
nations citizens, varied so widely.
How did political factors shape
these responses? What factors
facilitated or obstructed effective
responses? As the crisis continues
it becomes ever more important to
understand how and why we got
here, in order to determine where
we are now and where we might
be heading.

In the shadow of
the General
sudhir Hazareesingh
Oxford University Press

exit strategies and


state Building
richard caplan
(edited)
Oxford University Press USA

More than forty years after his


death, Charles de Gaulle is still
admired and adored in France.
Yet, his origins and background
nobility, Catholic Church and Army
- might make one wonder why
he nevertheless became such a
prominent public national figure.
In the Shadow of the General
answers this question by telling
de Gaulles life story alongside
the history of modern France. It
will be of interest to anyone trying
to understand French society
today and the life of one of the
main political protagonists of the
twentieth century.

States and multilateral organisations have been engaged in


plenty of peace and state-building
measures around the world. But
how do these operations come
to an end and which exit strategies can be used? Fifteen of
the worlds leading experts on
peace-building join forces to
provide a wide-ranging overview
of the topic. The book features
comprehensive policy analysis
of how state-building campaigns
actually end and includes different
perspectives on exit strategies on
an international basis.

In this comprehensive collection


of papers, twenty international
contributors discuss three
key themes of contemporary
governance the machinery of
government, the regulation and
control of public services, and
issues of performance, risk and
blame. The papers reect on
the contribution of Christopher
Hood to the study of executive
government and public services.
Hood has been a leading
observer of trends in public
explorations in Governance:
management and policy since
a collection of papers in honour the 1970s. The authors analyse
of christopher Hood
emerging themes and relevant
ruth Dixon and martin lodge
debates about governance and
(edited)
what we have learnt over the past
A booklet funded by the DPIR,
University of Oxford, the
Available at
Department of Government,
http://xgov.politics.ox.ac.uk
LSE, the Department of Politics,
http://goo.gl/a6eAL
University of Exeter, and the
Oxford Internet Institute

23

In Conversation

Bearing Witness
Jeremy Waldron, Chichele Professor of Social and
Political Theory and Fellow at All Souls College, talks
with Annette Zimmermann about Oxford, about why we
need political theory, and about his work on hate speech
When Jeremy Waldron first came to Oxford
as a graduate student in the late 1970s, it was
not only the prominence of this institution and
the spiritedness of the academic discussions
that made a deep impression on him. Waldron,
who makes a point of cultivating an eager
interest in the practical implications and in the
real-world applicability of his academic work in
legal and political theory, tells me that it was
also a more non-academic event that sparked
his interest: Once, I attended the trial of a
racist agitator in the Crown Court in Oxford. He
was charged under the Race Relations Act for
putting up posters depicting Britons of African
descent as apes, and convicted to a short term
of imprisonment. Waldron describes how,
when the agitator was taken away, there were
shouts of protest from the gallery people were
protesting that the man was merely making use
of his right to free speech. Going to that case
made a big impression on me. It lay dormant
for a while; but I was always suspicious of a
dismissal of hate speech laws.
Starting in 2005, however, Waldrons interest
in the issue of hate speech and the regulation
of free speech laws resurfaced. Following a
series of critical exchanges with John Durham
Peters and Anthony Lewis, and reviews of their
work, including Lewiss book Freedom for the
Speech We Hate, Waldron started to pursue
this topic in more depth. Arguing in favour of
the regulation of free speech is quite unusual,
especially in the American context, where such
regulations are often seen as an unacceptable
attack on the First Amendment. I got a lot of
hate mail, Waldron says, smiling a little. Be it in
spite of or because of the controversial nature
of this topic, the three lectures on hate speech
which Waldron gave subsequently as part of the
Holmes Lectures at Harvard Law School in 2009
were a huge success: There were a lot of
critical questions, but people were very attentive
because I was setting out a very careful
position, and new ideas about the relation
between hate speech laws and human dignity,
and issues about treating hate speech as group
defamation this had been very common in
the US in the 1950s, but had sort of faded from
view since then.

24

Waldron goes on to explain why simply


countering hate speech with more speech, as
many influential organisations like the American
Civil Liberties Union frequently suggest, is
not enough: It is important for Americans to
understand what those who are regulating hate
speech are doing, and its important for them
to feel a little bit more diffident about criticising
other countries for penalising hate speech
however, I think the gap between countries
that have such constitutional constraints and
those that dont is narrowing. According to
Waldron, since racist or sexist hate speech
causes emotional distress and incites hatred
and prejudice, it is legitimate to constrain
free speech. This issue frequently comes up
in current affairs, for example, recently in
connection with religious extremists picketing
funerals and inflicting a great deal of distress on
the families of dead soldiers and dead marines.
Im talking about the Westboro Baptist Church,
and the case of Snyder v. Phelps, in which,
although the Supreme Court decided against
regulating hate speech, there was an impressive
dissenting opinion by Justice Samuel Alito, who
dissented on the grounds that free speech does
not protect malicious and intentional infliction of
emotional distress. It was a very surprising and
thoughtful dissent.
The most powerful objection that Waldron has
encountered to date is one presented by his old
supervisor at Oxford and later, his colleague,
Ronald Dworkin. This argument is connected
to political legitimacy generated by free public
debate on controversial issues: Waldron
explains that if you ban people from hate
speech, then you are cutting off the extreme tail
ends of those debates, and Dworkin thinks that
undermines the legitimacy.
Since the lectures at Harvard had sparked so
much productive discussion, Waldron decided
to expand the topic in a book, The Harm in
Hate Speech, while teaching both at the Faculty
of Law at New York University and at Oxford,
where he was appointed as fellow and Chichele
Professor of Social and Political Theory in 2010.
Being back in Oxfords research community

... its a matter of


bearing witness
and speaking up
without timidity.

after living and working in the United States


for a long time is very special to Waldron: Ive
always been interested in the three areas of
political philosophy, political theory, and legal
philosophy, he says, and Oxford reinforced the
interdisciplinarity of my interests. It showed that
there are no real borders. But it wasnt just that
it was also being part of a cohort of students,
many of whom are back here now in positions of
responsibility: Leslie Green - he and I came here
in 1978 together and we both studied informally
with Joseph Raz; Nicola Lacey, who came in
1979 and who is at All Souls now; James Belich,
Professor of Imperial History; theres a bunch of
us. But it is not only the interactions with other
faculty members and participation in a variety of
events, such as the Jurisprudence Discussion
Group (a wonderfully exciting group of people)
that are part of Oxford life it is also the
interactions with students, who are, according
to Waldron, scarily smart.

This shows what makes Oxford special in


Waldrons eyes: the inspiring interactions with
other academics, the collegiate organisation,
and the interdisciplinarity. Even though Oxford
has become busier and more formalised since
Waldon was a junior fellow at Lincoln College,
when one could witness the great titans of
legal and political theory, such as Dworkin
confronting John Finnis, Bernard Williams, or
Richard Hare, the interdisciplinarity is still a
key part of the Oxford experience. However,
Waldron warns that this interdisciplinarity needs
to be cherished, which is why departments
should continue ensuring access to their events
to all students, publicise their lectures, and
encourage cross-disciplinary exchange.
Being able to take a different perspective is
especially important for political philosophers,
who are part of a discipline that may often be
seen as too theoretical, as a bit detached from

reality. On the one hand, this is a good thing:


we have a very special responsibility to think
as hard as we can and to set aside time just
for thinking about deep theoretical issues
even though it may not have a direct political
applicability. This is the difference between
politicians and political theorists. We have
to figure out the history of political thought,
figure out the concepts and the ideas. There
are mountains to scale there. However, on the
other hand, it is important to make political and
legal theory political: our work does have a
direct political impact. In the past ten or twelve
years, everybody should have been thinking
hard about torture, and the abuse of detainees
and programmes of indefinite detention, and
now issues about drone warfare. And it turns
out that the work that I did on the rule of law,
on the nature of human rights, on the nature of
moral prohibitions was massively relevant, and
it would have been wrong not to take additional

time as a political theorist to think about


these issues. Its important to have political
philosophers thinking as hard as they can
about the background problems, but when the
foreground issues come forward its a matter
of bearing witness and speaking up without
timidity.

Annette Zimmermann
MPhil Candidate in Politics
(Political Theory)

25

DPIr ArtIst In resIDence

eXecUtIve eDUcAtIon At DPIr

DPIR has over the past two


years hosted three Foreign
& Commonwealth Office
Chevening sponsored week-long
Exec-Ed programmes for Indian
MPs. The experience has been
exhilarating and we look forward
to having the opportunity to
continue this kind of work.
I had a fantastic time and the
learning experience for me was
very rich and at the same time
intellectually very stimulating.
Dr Ajoy Kumar

Member of Parliament Lok Sabha Jamshedpur

Everyone appreciated the


content and quality of the
academic program and I am
confident the experience will
remain with us all throughout
our journeys.

Jayant chaudhary

Member of Parliament Lok Sabha and National


General Secretary of the Rashtriya Lok Dal

All of us are aware of the huge and growing


importance of the Indian economy and the great
vitality of its society. We also remember that it is
the worlds largest democracy.
The programmes have highlighted the diversity
and depth of what DPIR faculty, assisted by
others in the University, can exchange with
international political leaders. Over a week of
discussions our academics have presented their
research on topics such as, The end of war?,
Responses to the Euro Crisis, Parliamentary
standards, The Chinese succession and
beyond, The US elections and Emotions and
politics. Over thirty MPs have visited over
three programmes. As some of the comments
we have received in feedback make clear, the
response from the MPs has been overwhelmingly
positive.

maxim Kantor
We refer to Maxim as our artist in residence wishing only that we had
a residence to put him in. He regularly visits Oxford, in part no doubt
because his son Georgy is Fellow in Ancient History at St Johns, but
also because he works with Stephen Whitefield they have staged two
exhibitions in the Manor Road Building and, jointly with the Ashmolean
Museum, organised a major international symposium, Volcano,
which brought political scientists, economists, clerics, film makers,
philosophers, reporters and artists together to discuss the global
financial crisis.
Maxims work is intensely political, engaging not just with formal political
institutions or international relations and war, but also with the impact of
all of these on peoples lives, particularly those most negatively affected.
Much of his work reects the impact of the collapse of the Communist
system and its replacement by an overt kleptocracy. But more recently
he has engaged with what that kleptocracy has in common with our own
elites.
Maxim is among the most important and successful living Russian artists
and novelists. Jon Whiteley, Senior Assistant Keeper in the Department
of Western Art at the Ashmolean, writes: His art has often been
compared to the work of Georg Grosz and the artists of the Weimar
Republic but the comparison is shallow. His real roots are to be traced
to Goya, Daumier, Rembrandt and Van Gogh, artists whom he much
admires. These roots are to be found not in formal similarities but in a
passionate involvement with human issues.
We hope to continue our association with Maxim over the next few years.
His current major exhibition is at this years Venice Biennale. Perhaps he
can be persuaded to bring it to Oxford and DPIR next.
The Structure of Democracy, 2004

This initiative is the start of what we hope will


be an attempt to broaden our engagement with
those outside the academic community. We
have, of course, always advised politicians and
other leaders. But there is acceptance that we
can do much more. At present, therefore, we
are systematically working through possible
avenues of further executive education, as one
way in which we can take what we do best our
academic research and translate it into useful
courses of interest to a wide audience.

Red Tower, 2005

26

Gravediggers, 1999

27

Programme of events

ALUMNI WEEKEND 2013


www.alumniweekend.ox.ac.uk

20 22 September 2013

Join fellow Oxonians for three days of academic lectures, informative talks and
special visits across the spectrum of academic disciplines. Learn something new,
or relearn something old; find out about the most pressing issues for society and
how the University is working towards finding solutions; and discuss and debate
everything youve heard with your peers, in the finest tradition of Oxford.
saturday 21 september 2013
10:00am 11:15pm
From the Arab spring to
the syrian War: regional,
International
and Humanitarian Impact
In this session, Dr Hugo
Slim and Dr Louise
Fawcett will examine the
political and humanitarian
dynamics behind the Arab
Spring and the Syrian War.

How to book

sad Business school

11:45am 1.00pm
the Arrogance of Power:
senator Fulbrights
concept and todays
World
In 1966 Senator J. William
Fulbright published The
Arrogance of Power, which
referred to the arrogance,
not of one particular
administration, but of
whole societies. Professor
Sir Adam Roberts
examines whether Senator
Fulbrights diagnosis and
prescription was right in his
own time and whether it is
still relevant in our time.

4:15pm 5:30pm
commemorating the
First World War
Despite the enormity
of the events of 193945, including Hiroshima
and the Holocaust, the
First World War retains a
special place in modern
memory. In this lecture,
Professor Martin Ceadel
and Dr Edward Keene
attempt to explain why,
and will explore what
the international pattern
of the wars centennial
commemorations reveals.

Booking for Professor Sir Adam Roberts lecture is via the DPIR website:
www.politics.ox.ac.uk/index.php/event-registration.html. Booking is open until Monday 9 September.
Booking for the other two sessions is via the University Alumni website and brochure:
www.alumniweekend.ox.ac.uk. Booking is open until Friday 30 August.

DPIr AlUmnI event

SATURDAY 30 NOVEMBER 2013

constItUtIonAl cHAnGe AnD PolItIcAl tHeorY


Please join us for a Politics and International relations
alumni conference and dinner.

The event will be convened by Professor Jeremy Waldron, Chichele


Professor of Social and Political Theory. This is an exciting opportunity
for our faculty and researchers to welcome you into the Department.
Full details will be available shortly at
http://www.politics.ox.ac.uk/index.php/alumni/alumni.html

También podría gustarte